See Also

Just eight men have run the Federal Reserve Board since Franklin Delano Roosevelt named Marriner Stoddard Eccles, the western Mormon banker who embraced the New Deal, to the newly reconfigured post of chairman. Three, including Eccles, have been long-reigning; two have served two terms and stepped down; and two have been short-timers.

It is beginning to look like no matter who wins next Tuesday’s election, the eighth Fed chairman, Ben Bernanke, whose second term expires on Jan. 31, 2014, will join the two terms-and-out crowd.

Republican candidate Mitt Romney has vowed to replace him with someone favoring a less expansive monetary policy.

Meanwhile, a Bernanke friend told Bloomberg News in an off-the-record comment that the Princeton scholar of depression-era monetary policy, whom historians will credit with taking the decisive actions in 2008 and 2009 that prevented the U.S. economy from plunging into a second Great Depression, is anxious to step aside after eight tumultuous years in the top job.

His term as a Fed governor doesn’t expire until 2020.

Though most voters haven’t given it a thought, the outcome of the election will have a major impact on monetary policy and therefore on the economy. Current policy is locked into near zero short-term interest rates until mid-2015 and the Fed has embarked on a series of bond purchases, so-called quantitative easing, to force long-term rates lower.

With Republicans in a divided government insisting on restrictive fiscal policies, monetary policy has shouldered the responsibility over the past two years for keeping the economy from plunging into a double-dip recession. A second Obama administration, should Bernanke step down, would appoint someone who promises to keep those policies in place – at least until the economy showed clear signs that it was on a glide path to sustained economic growth of at least 3 percent per year with unemployment declining rapidly.

Republican standard bearer Mitt Romney, on the other hand, has vowed to replace Bernanke with someone favoring tighter controls on the money supply. As early as September 2011, while fending off challenges from his right for the Republican nomination, the former Massachusetts governor blasted Bernanke’s second round of quantitative easing as “overinflat(ing) the amount of currency” without putting Americans back to work.

Nearly a year later, in an interview with Fox television, Romney said he wanted “monetary stability that leads to a strong dollar and confidence that America is not going to go down the road that other nations have gone down, to their peril.” In September, shortly before “moderate Mitt” emerged in the first debate with the president, Romney’s top policy adviser again attacked the Fed, this time for its third round of quantitative easing. “We should be creating wealth, not printing dollars,” Lanhee Chen said in a prepared statement.

One thing is certain. The independent Fed won’t change policies quickly or rashly, especially in an era of increased transparency in its actions. “This is a coherent institution,” said John Makin, an economist at the American Enterprise Institute. “You don’t get a divided Fed except under extreme conditions.”

So whom would Romney or Obama appoint to the powerful Fed top job? Speculation has focused on three possible candidates for each side, although it’s always possible for a wild card to emerge.